ITAT held that Rule 128(9) of the Rules does not provide for disallowance of Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) in case of delay in filing Form No. 67; (ii) filing of Form No. 67 is not mandatory but a directory requirement and (iii) DTAA overrides the provisions of the Act and the Rules cannot be contrary to the Act.
ITAT Bangalore held that rule 10B(2)(d) of the Income Tax Rules provide that the company is in the wholesale trading and retail trading have to be considered separately for the purpose of comparison.
Dr. Sankaran Sundar Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore) The penalty imposed u/s 271D of the I.T.Act is independent of assessment proceedings completed u/s 143(3) of the I.T.Act. Even without completion of assessment u/s 143(3) of the I.T.Act, penalty u/s 271D of the I.T.Act can be imposed for violation of provisions of section 269SS of the I.T.Act. […]
ITAT Bangalore held that rule 128(9) of the Income Tax Rules doesnt provide for disallowance of Foreign Tax Credit in case of delay in filing of Form No. 67 and Filing of Form No. 67 is not mandatory, hence Foreign Tax Credit cannot be denied for delay in furnishing of Form No. 67.
CBDT instructions dated 09/08/2019 speaks about the comparative analysis of cash deposits, cash sales, month wise cash sales and cash deposits. It also provides that whether in such cases the books of accounts have been rejected or not where substantial evidences of vide variation be found between these statistical analyses.
ITAT Bangalore held that inspite of repeated intimation informing the amalgamation of the assessee, the assessment has been completed on a non-existing i.e. amalgamated company and therefore the the assessment order in the name of amalgamated company is treated as null and void.
ITAT Bangalore held that each and every deposit during the demonetization period would not fall under the category of unaccounted cash. However the burden is on the assessee to establish the genuineness of the deposit in order to fall outside the scope of unaccounted cash.
ITAT Bangalore held that AO cannot go beyond the profits as per profit and loss account prepared in accordance with the Companies Act except in the manner provided in Explanation 1 to section 115JB. therefore the action of the AO to make the adjustment for the disallowance u/s. 14A to the book profits u/s. 115JB is not tenable.
ITAT Bangalore held that revisionary powers u/s 263 of the Act rightly exercised by ld.Pr. CIT as AO failed to discharge his duty. Cash deposited during the demonetization period should be assessed as per CBDT guidelines.
ITAT Bangalore held that as per provisions of section 43B(f) of the Income Tax Act deduction on leave encashment is available on actual payment basis and not available on accrual basis.
